The present disclosure generally relates to a slip-resistance patch for oral devices that can maintain contact with a surface within an oral cavity.
Embodiments of the present disclosure generally relate to oral devices positioned within an oral cavity. The oral cavity commonly refers to a human mouth and all parts of the month such as lips, a tongue, teeth, a mouth roof, and a mouth floor. Oral devices are used for a number of applications that can include, but are not limited to, evaluative, diagnostic, therapeutic, and assistive applications. These devices are designed to be placed inside the oral cavity or in contact with at least portion of the oral cavity. Oral devices in the present art, are often made out of materials that are antibacterial, and depending upon the application, are hard structures, durable, resilient, or sturdy. Familiar examples can include plastics or silicon rubbers. When these materials are placed in an oral cavity, which is a salivated and wet environment, issues and challenges arise if the oral device is not fixated, secured, or otherwise anchored in an intended or optimal position. Without having the oral device secured, the oral device often slips from the intended position, hindering the oral device's ability to be properly used for its intended purpose or application. For example, an oral device used for assessing lingual function, such as tongue strength and tongue endurance, is an Iowa Oral Performance Instrument (IOPI). The IOPI is a smooth plastic, air-filled pressure lingual bulb, commonly known as a tongue bulb, which is placed in a standardized position on a patient's tongue within an oral cavity of the patient. The standardized position is 10-mm from a distal tip of the tongue of the patient for anterior tongue performance measures or 10-mm anterior to the patient's circumvallate papillae for posterior tongue performance measures. The IOPI has been found to have issues regarding slippage from the standardized position, which reduces precision and reliability of measurements recorded during the assessment. Therein, this creates concern to those in the art that measurements from oral devices are inconsistent, unreliable, and can lead to an increased risk of inaccurately evaluating, diagnosing, rehabilitating, and/or preventing lingual disorders, in addition to potentially imposing on one's quality of life. In general, tongue muscle performance has shown to decline as an individual ages, causing the individual's risk of an orofacial myofunctional disorder such as dysphagia and sleep apnea to increase. With use of therapeutic work for lingual function, tongue muscle performance can be restored; however, many insurance companies have required an assessment of lingual function, typically by the IOPI assessment, prior to assisting in cost associated with therapeutic work to validate that the work is necessary. Therefore, a reliable and objective assessment of lingual function is important because without a healthy tongue strength and endurance, the individual may have difficultly performing daily functional tasks such as swallowing, articulation, and maintaining an open upper airway. Therefore, there is a need for a simple and cost-effective solution to reduce oral device slippage from its intended position.
In one aspect, a slip-resistant patch for a tongue bulb comprises a perimeter portion. The perimeter portion defines a shape and size of the slip-resistant patch. A planar body is defined by the perimeter portion of the slip-resistant patch. The planar body is configured to contour to a surface of the tongue bulb. The planar body comprises a first major surface and an opposing second major surface. The first major surface comprises a textured material and the second major surface comprises an adhesive material. The textured material is configured to be positioned on a surface of an oral cavity and maintain position on the surface of the oral cavity throughout lingual movement within the oral cavity. The adhesive material is of a pressure sensitive material and configured to adhere to the surface of the tongue bulb.
In another aspect, a method to reduce slippage of a tongue bulb comprises providing at least one slip-resistant patch including a textured material and an adhesive material. The textured material comprises a textured surface and the adhesive material comprises an adhesive surface on an opposing face of the patch. The adhesive material is at least a portion of a pressure sensitive material. The adhesive surface is adhered to at least one surface of the tongue bulb, creating a texturized tongue bulb. The texturized tongue bulb is placed in contact with at least one surface of a patient's oral cavity.
Other aspects and features will be apparent hereinafter.
For a better understanding of the nature and objects of the disclosure, reference should be made to the following detailed description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which:
Reference is made in the following detailed description of preferred embodiments to accompanying drawings, which form a part hereof, wherein like numerals may designate like parts throughout that are corresponding and/or analogous. It will be appreciated that the figures have not necessarily been drawn to scale, such as for simplicity and/or clarity of illustration. For example, dimensions of some aspects may be exaggerated relative to others. Further, it is to be understood that other embodiments may be utilized. Furthermore, structural and/or other changes may be made without departing from claimed subject matter. References throughout this specification to “claimed subject matter” refer to subject matter intended to be covered by one or more claims, or any portion thereof, and are not necessarily intended to refer to a complete claim set, to a particular combination of claim sets (e.g., method claims, apparatus claims, etc.), or to a particular claim.
The present disclosure provides a slip-resistant patch 10 that is a cost-effective for retrofitting and modifying an existing oral device 12 to ensure the existing oral device can maintain in an intended position 14 or placement inside a patient's oral cavity, as best shown in
As shown in
The perimeter portion 22 of the slip-resistant patch 10 defines geometry or shape of the slip-resistant patch, as best shown in
The textured material 24, as best shown in
As best shown in
In alternative embodiments of the present disclosure, the slip-resistant patch 10 can be in a pouch-like patch, as shown in
Referring to
In the present disclosure the term ‘slippage’ is used to describe the movement of an oral device within an oral cavity, such as sliding around on the patient's tongue. Further, ‘slippage’ is primarily useful in characterizing unwanted or undesirable movement of the oral device within the oral cavity. Therefore, slippage of an oral device is movement that leads to inability, difficulty, or hindrance in using an oral device for an intended purpose or application. Further, an existing oral device 12, as best shown in
The foregoing description has been presented for the purposes of illustration and description. It is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the disclosure to the precise form disclosed. Many modifications and variations are possible in view of this disclosure. Indeed, while certain features of this disclosure have been shown, described and/or claimed, it is not intended to be limited to the details above, since it will be understood that various omissions, modifications, substitutions and changes in the apparatuses, forms, method, steps and system illustrated and in its operation can be made by those skilled in the art without departing in any way from the spirit of the present disclosure.
Furthermore, the foregoing description, for purposes of explanation, used specific nomenclature to provide a thorough understanding of the disclosure. However, it will be apparent to one skilled in the art that the specific details are not required in order to practice the disclosure. Thus, the foregoing descriptions of specific embodiments of the present disclosure are presented for purposes of illustration and description. They are not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the disclosure to the precise forms disclosed, many modifications and variations are possible in view of the above teachings. The embodiments were chosen and described in order to best explain the principles of the disclosure and its practical applications, to thereby enable others skilled in the art to best utilize the disclosed system and method, and various embodiments with various modifications as are suited to the particular use contemplated.
This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional patent Application Ser. No. 62/936,098, filed Nov. 15, 2019, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Entry |
---|
Solomon et al., “Assessment of Orofacial Strength in Patients with Dysarthria,” J Med Speech Lang Pathol. Dec. 1, 2008; 16(4): 251-258. (Year: 2008). |
Youmans et al., “Measures of tongue function related to normal swallowing”, Dysphagia, 21(2), p. 102-11, Apr. 2006. |
Robbins et al., “The effects of lingual exercise in stroke patients with dysphagia”, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 88(2), p. 150-158, Feb. 2007. |
Hewitt et al., “Standardized Instrument for Lingual Pressure Measurement”, Dysphagia, (1), 16-25, Apr. 2008. |
Neel et al., “Can IOPI be used to measure tongue pressure for speech sounds?”, Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 16(4), 235. |
Yoshikawa et al., Comparison of Three Types of Tongue Pressure Measurement Devices:, Dysphagia, (3), 6 pages, Jul. 11, 2010. |
Adams et al., “A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Measurements of Tongue and Hand Strength and Endurance Using the Iowa Oral Performance Instrument (IOPI)”, Dysphagia, 28, 350-369, Mar. 7, 2013. |
Ray et a;., “Enhancing Swallowing Functions with IOPI: A Case Report”, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, (10). Retrieved on Nov. 19, 2021 from https://www.archives-pmr.org/action/showPdf?pii=S0003-9993%2816%2930870-X. |
Villa et al., “Can myofunctional therapy increase tongue tone and reduce symptoms in children with sleep-disordered breathing?” Sleep & Breathing, 21(4), 1025-1032, Mar. 18, 2017. |
Keskool et al, “The Relationships among Objective Measures of Tongue Strength and Risk of Aspiration”, Siriraj Medical Journal, 70(4), 302-309.(2018). |
Pitts et al., “Lingual Pressure as a Clinical Indicator of Swallowing Function in Parkinson's Disease”, Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research, 61(2), 257-265.(2018). |
Park et al., “Effect of tongue strength training using the Iowa Oral Performance Instrument in stroke patients with dysphagia”, Journal of Physical Therapy Science, 27(12), 3631-3634, Aug. 2015. |
Temple, “OPI Products—IOPI Medical”, Retrieved on Nov. 19, 2021 from https://iopimedica..com. |
Hart, T. [IOPI Medical]. (Nov. 11, 2013). IOPI Demo Video. Retrieved on Mar. 25, 2019 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvANJ2XHp0E&t=685s. |
Adams et al., “Reliability of measurements of tongue and hand strength and endurance using the Iowa Oral Performance Instrument with healthy adults”, Dysphagia, 29(1), 83-95, Sep. 18, 2013. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20210169416 A1 | Jun 2021 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62936098 | Nov 2019 | US |